UPDATE and resolution for Yabbadoo - THE END The Hastings e_mail (posted 13th July) appeared to be final (extract - " I apologise for any misunderstanding but am unable to offer any refund on this occasion ") so little room for misunderstanding that statement ! However I'm pleased to report that they've now re-assessed the situation in its entirety and Hastings have fully refunded both the excess charge and the admin fee, a total of £135.20. My daughter is quite pleased, as am I. Took a while, but justice prevailed (eventually). Thank you, Jamie, if this result was down to your efforts (you did say you would follow it up).

Supplement - "RESOLUTION" e_mail just received from Hastings - direct paste (edited to remove personal ID, plus edited to make para 2 say what they meant to say! ) Dear Mr and Miss (yabbadoo),Thank you for your email dated the 13th June 2012, I have looked into the issues you have raised and would like to offer a response. I understand from your comments that you are unhappy that we have amended the vehicle purchase date on your policy (NOTunhappy with that -yabbadoo) and we have charged you an additional premium of £135.12 which includes our £35.00 administration fee. You did not input the purchase date as 2005 and this is obviously an issue within the transfer of data between Comparethemarket.com and ourselves; we did not call you back as agreed. Your policy documentation did not state the date of acquisition, so you could not contact us to inform us of an error. You have been on a consumer forum and there is another policyholder with the exact same issue so this may (NOT - added by yabbadoo) be a one off incident. You would like us to refund some if not all of the premium and fees charged and you do not understand why a vehicle purchase date would make any difference to your premium. Having reviewed your policy I can confirm this was set up with a vehicle purchase date of the 1st July 2005. We requested a copy of your V5 and this confirmed that the purchase date was the 5th April 2012. Having looked into your online quotation we can confirm that you did 6 online quotations with CompareTheMarket.com and these all show the incorrect purchase date of 1st July 2005. You also did 2 quotations with Tesco Compare and also 1 quotation with GoCompare which stated the correct purchase date. The policy you took out was through CompareTheMarket.com and therefore appeared to have the wrong purchase date and I can confirm that there was no problem with the transfer of data. You state that we did not call you back as promised, however I can see that we called you on the 22nd May 2012 but had to leave a message.. We also telephoned on the 1st June 2012 at 11:05 and left a message, we also telephoned your father on the 12th June 2012 at 19:50 on 01462 618126 however we were unsuccessful. I can confirm that if you would like to look on your Statement of Motor Insurance on the first page under vehicle details you will see that it states year vehicle purchased 2005. The reason your Insurer rates on the vehicle purchase date is that the longer you have a vehicle and are driving it the more experienced you become with that vehicle. It is deemed a higher risk if you have a new vehicle that you have not driven before. You state that your father’s premium reduced this however this is with a different Insurer and it may be because it is a new car purchased with a higher value and it is assumed that you will be more careful with a new car. All risk and premiums are calculated by the insurer. We find that people do occasionally input the incorrect information online, however we are required to ensure that all information provided is correct in order to ensure your policy remains validated. We need to amend any material facts and any changes to your policy may result in a change in premium, in this case £100.12 to which we added our £35.00 administration fee. I appreciate that this may not be the outcome you were hoping for but I can assure you that the correct procedure has been followed. I apologise for any misunderstanding but am unable to offer any refund on this occasion. I am sorry for any concern this matter has caused you and I trust that you find our explanation and that our actions have resolved the matter to your satisfaction. If however you wish to discuss the matter further then please do contact me directly. If however you do remain dissatisfied with our actual handling of your complaint or indeed the outcome, you are entitled to refer your case to the Financial Ombudsman Service. Should you wish to do this, you must do so within 6 months from the date of this e-mail. Please follow this link which provides you with some further details about the Financial Ombudsman Service and their contact details if you do decide to contact them. (link removed, I'm not yet allowed to post links in this forum) Finally, thank you for taking the time to tell us about your experience, we are very grateful for the feedback you have already given us and I can assure you this will be put to good use in helping us to improve our service. Yours sincerely Lorraine Baker Customer Relations Representative HastingsDirect Hastings Insurance Services Ltd 01424 739338 ext - 7249 COMMENT from yabbadoo The main issue for us is the acquisition date, and the impact on the quotation - that my daughter inadvertently failed to correct the pre-filled field on comparethemarket (thus providing Hastings with wrong info) has proved costly. The subsidiary issue - direct debiting the additional cost without prior notification - we have only their word about their attempts to contact us (and I note they don;t repeat their original statement that they called her on 31st May, when she was in hospital with her phone "on" yet there's no missed calls - some doubt therefore as to whether the remainder listed actually took place! And they have NOT addressed the point that their letter advising the deduction arrived almost a week after it had been taken. It would also help if their customer service was more efficient (it shouldn't have taken this long to respond, and I did half the work for them anyway, by identifying the data error source) OR if they could actually write meaningful sentences (note the corrections I had to do to make their sentence accurate, and the ommision of the key word "NOT" in it) And the paragraph "The reason ... is poor English, bad grammar and downright condescending. So, NO I'm not happy with their "resolution", but as the original data entry error was ours, not theirs, there's little or no likelihood that escalating it would acheive anything more positive. However, I am delighted about one thing - they found my feedback useful, and their service will be improved necause of it (Duck, there's low-flying porkers around !!) Needless to say, it's unlikely that any of my family or friends will be considering Hastings in the future. Wish you luck, Wykelass, if you decide to continue ....

I apologise! Your last-but-one post (penultimate para) asked for forum advice, and as a forum member I responded to that, having re-read your original post, specifically 2nd para, point 2/ , and in light of the fact you have received a £470 refund. I've had experience (before this current event) of an insurance co. debiting a second amount because of a needed adjustment, and I was pre-advised of it (unlike our current situation with Hastings). I believe that one gives authority to "direct debit" in respect of a contract, not just one specific amount (and contracts can change if the base information proves to be wrong, hence the original authority covers a second debit) I don't think I've "hi-jacked" your thread. There are clear similarities in both our cases. In my case, I've independently found the source of OUR wrong date submitted to Hastings. It was the "comparison site" data (so, our error) and yes, I did suggest the same MIGHT apply to you, BUT also immediately credited you with supplying corrected info to Hastings in their requested time-frame, per your post. That's the only "assumption" I made - all else is from your posts. I would willingly edit to remove what you feel is inappropriate, (even though my "source" is your own posts) except I can't find an "edit" tool on site to do it (it only exists on the original submission page, not after) but I'll not be changing my view that, given the circumstances/events you've published, you've had a reasonable result, and it's unlikely you'll get a better financial one by cancelling and changing insurers part-way through a year. I fully understand (and share!) your frustrations with the way Hastings have treated you.

OK, an update from me First, I was/still am acting (with her permission, given in phone call from her to Hastings which they recorded). Today she received a "holding" letter from Hastings (to her, not me, the originator of the complaint) advising they need a further 28 days to continue investigations. (did you see the many awards they received for Customer Service? Wooden spoons, perhaps :>) I digress.... back to topic! ) Second - I may have found the "glitch" (assuming the two comparison sites "comparethemarket" (which she used) and "gocompare" (which I use for my own insurance) NB - other sites may have the same style/data capture set-up. Both sites store your ALL data, which simplifies repeat searches the following year. Both sites offer car "change" facility. Critically, the "acquisition" date is on a separate page AND IS PRE-FILLED with the original date declared for the previous car. Thus it CAN be overlooked (it was in Zoe's case, the 2004 date retained and thus subsequently transferred to Hastings was the date she got her FIRST car). It's easy to check, Wykelass - go to the comparison site you used and check the vehicle detail stored - is your acquisition date correct on the comparison website? If not, it should be corrected for future use. However (I've re-read your original post) you had actually corrected that information in a proper time-frame via e_mail direct to Hastings, so that should not be a continuing factor. You have at least had a "result" (substantial refund) We haven't, yet.. Given the additional complicating factors in your specific case, i.e.break in insurance, (plus, all insurance co's charge admin fees), you may still feel unhappy, but in my humble opinion it's not worth the hassle of pursuing it further.. After charges, the cost saving will be minimal, if any (and you would almost certainly have similar problems with a new insurer because of the insurance cover break).. Re "unauthorised debit" - I think you will find a "catch-all" clause somewhere in the very small print in the insurance contract, to the effect that they can debit additional costs of the policy if it changes (as it has). Not my place to go into that, other than say if you can't agree on this, take it up with your bank (Direct Debit guarantee). To go back to my daughter's case, still open, She changed her car in April, updated her insurance and paid a small premium (plus exorbitant admin charge) to change her policy, which expired in May. Then, chose Hastings, via comparethemarket She is an experienced driver with 5 years NCB, was 26 (now 27). Our dispute with Hastings is WHY penalise her over 30% just because an acquisition date is wrong? She was already driving the 1.4 diesel Fiesta (in old terms a modest Group 4 vehicle) on policy renewal date - it's not as though she's a "new" driver or it's a "performance" car. To put it into perspective - her Fiesta 1.4 diesel was originally mine - 9 years old, value £2500. MY insurance on it was about £250. (I had 7 years NCB) I've just bought a 2010 Fiesta 1.4 zetec diesel to replace it - worth £10,000, and my insurance from Aug has DROPPED to £180 (despite there being £7500 more insured value). Sorry, Jamie, I think I've found the cause of the wrong acquisition date, but that in itself neither explains nor warrants Zoe's premium hike from the original quote to what it is now - >30% , a well over £100 surcharge. Unlike Wykelass, I don't question the validity of taking it via direct debit, what I DO question is the amount (and the fact the advice arrived almost a week after the deduction) That too can be partially explained - the double bank holiday in June (though had you used 1st class mail as any responsible Company usually does when advising financial deductions, that would not have been a factor. All down to Customer Service, and what is or is not acceptable. From your viewpoint, you saved 20p postage, From Zoe's, she had an unadvised debit, making her overdrawn and into bank charges. Excellent service! Await the eventual outcome, will post it (28 days, they say ....)

Would appreciate contact/update - thanks.

Update to forum - similar result as Wykelass - I too contacted Jamie with full detail (as already reported) - received response "will pass it on to the team" since which, absolutely NOTHING. As I mentioned, Jamie's e_mail included a lsit of about 10 "service" awards to Hastings., Wykelass and my experiences at the hands of Hastings cast a large doubt over the validity/veracity of those awards - I certainly will not be doing business with them anytime soon, and I would urge others to think long anf hard before committing their hard-earned cash to the Hastings coffers - Wykelass and I have, I believe, been royally ripped off with their add-on charges after our initial payments in full ! Next step I believe is the Finanacial Ombudsman (BUT I believe that before that can happen, we need a letter from Hastings advising of impasse - their "get-out" (cop-out?) on that appears to be to ignore the issues completely..

I too was redirected to the "Hastings" thread - also received an apparently sympathetic response from the Hastings rep, requesting I privately send full details to him direct (which I did). His response was that it had been forwarded to the Hastings team for evaluation/reply. Still waiting, but to be fair it's currently only a day. ( they have an impressive list of Cust Service awards, don't they? Impressing who, I wonder? ). Critical pont is that you (like my daughter) are accused of entering an acquisition date some years prior to the actual date (which resulted in similar financial penaties) My daughter originally entered her details in "comparethemarket.com". Reasonably intelligent, has a Uni degree, is computer-literate, and not a novice at using comparison sites. The so-called acquisition date is spurious (as apparently is yours) but nevertheless I fail to see how (having been insured for the same car with her previous insurer, only changed to Hastings when that policy expired) Hastings can claim that length of ownership is a valid reason for increasing her premium by over £100 + Admin fee £35 just to change the date!! Don't know whether this has any relevance to your situation - as I said, it's a key fact that both you and she have had major problems because of the "ownership date". Difficult to believe that two similar data input "errors" could occur in the same time-frame in the same data field. I have made that "coincidence" clear in my submission to Hastings - I will also post any result both here and in the Hastings thread. Thanks for your response!

SNIP QUOTE ""but they said it confirmed my ownership since early April (the day I bought the car) and not a date from 2004 as I had originally entered. I was confused as to why they had come up with a date from 2004 - the original application I had made on the day I bought the car had been confirmed by their email when I took out the insurance - I had not mistakenly entered a date from 2004."" END SNIP How very odd - see thread "length of ownership" above - IDENTICAL situation, my daughter owned her car from Apr 2012 BUT Hastings claim she entered a date years earlier ... and penalised her similarly (sent a letter dated 1st June advising of additional deduction. It arrived 12th June, the deduction taken 7th June) In addition, they CLAIMED they'd called her 31st May. On that day she was in hospital, with nothing to do except recover from her operation - had her phone but received no calls from Hastings. She's not stupid (has a Uni degree) she wouldn't have entered July 2007 (or whatever) when she got the car (from me) 5 April 2012, and was insured elsewhere from that date. As you have identical experience it seems that there's a problem either with comparethemarket.com website (which she used for original comprison quote), or that Hastings have a glitch in data transfer from it. Either way, Hastings are massively benefitting from both massive premium increases and excessive "admin" fees (£35 just to change a date!!)

Daughter acquired her latest car in Apr 2012, notified her insurance co and paid the additional premium versus her old car.. Policy expired mid-May. xxxxxxxxxxxxxx" filled in her details (which included date of car purchase) and chose Hastings Direct, who insured her (she has 5 years NCB) but subsequently asked for sight of V5C. They then sent her a letter which arrived today (12th June) advising they had debited her a further £140. They SAY she put her acquisition date as 2005, and the premium increase reflects her increased risk of accident due to unfamiliarity with the car (it's a 1.4 Fiesta) - and that underwriters reduce premiums for cars owned a long time. Is this correct? a 33% premium increase just because she has a "new" 10 year-old car?